So…did we enjoy the protection of two oceans during the Revolutionary War?

Or how about during the war of 1812, when the British sailed over and burned Washington D.C?

Or how about during WWII, when Hawaii got bombed and we had German submarines off our coasts?

That whole “two oceans” thing is 100% bullshit.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I think fighting the barbary pirates and raiding their bases without a declaration of war is a little different than invading a sovereign nation for regime change, and then occupying it for 5 years afterwards, all without a declaration of war.

I think the role of the military industrial complex and AIPAC (and the rest of the Jewish nationalists) shouldn’t be ignored.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

So Jefferson can use his presidential powers to fight off a handful of pirates and that somehow justifies Iraq?

Please… this typical neocon argument has been used before with no success. It proves nothing first of all because you’re comparing apples and oranges, secondly because you bloat some of your facts, and thirdly because even if your pirate examples are legit, wrong actions in the past do not justify or current mistakes.

“Yet our Presidents since the time of Thomas Jefferson have engaged in at least 12-17+ undeclared wars.”

Oh really? Who were the terrorists that hated us then? What were the names of those wars? How many years did those wars last? How deep in debt did we go by funding these wars?

Throwing out numbers is pretty easy, backing it up factually with valid examples is another story.

Wordsmith writes:

“Furthermore, historically, it is quite the norm for us to turn our warriors into social workers, as an occupying force”…

Try this on for size and see if it makes sense. “Furthermore it is quite the norm” for us to allow illegal immigrants to cross our borders. Furthermore it is quite the norm for us to vote for unbalanced budgets. Furthermore it is quite the norm that we spy on citizens, it is quite the norm that we establish a welfare state through so many of our socialist policies.

You’re going to have to do better than that. Providing examples of past mistakes DOES NOT justify the current mistakes.

I also find it troubling that you fail to understand the definition between isolation and non-intervention.

Many people here and abroad would disagree with your opinion that “the U.S. is not a hostile power”. Even if we aren’t, have we not funded and aided hostile powers and conitnue to do so now – including the state of Israel? Yes, we do. I believe that’s called intervention and is precisely the peril of our entangling foreign policy.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

A very good counter to this article can be read by historian Thomas Woods:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods45.html

Like or Dislike: 0  0

isolationism = I won’t speak to my neighbors

interventionism = I go over to my neighbor’s house and tell his kids what to do

non-interventionism = I can still speak to my neighbor, but not tell his kids what to do

ergo,

isolationsim ≠ non-interventionism

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Why do we have so many cowards in our country today?
Why would anyone support such a cowardly act as the invasion and continued occupation of a sovereign nation that didn’t attack or threaten us?
People need to stop being afraid of the bogeyman and grow up.
Frankly, these cowards make me sick.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“In May of 1801, the Corsairs of Tripoli became restless and declared war on the United States”

This was not done by a written law (as they were,afterall–pirates) but by cutting down the flagpole of the US Consulate.

So a comparison to Iraq is not entirely correct. Because while Tripoli WANTED War with us, and committed an act of War AGAINST us, Iraq did not.

A brilliant entry though. I am a Ron Paul supporter, and i’m glad to see this kind of intelligent dialoguem rather than the typical, “He is anti-war and therefor liberal!” bullshit.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

drop the Constitution canard, they simply pick up another one

I’m sure some people do do this, but on the other hand it’s also easy to get this impression if you’re arguing with a bunch of people at once. I was never particularly impressed with the arguments (about the war) based on constitutionality, nor do I support Paul because I think he’s the self-styled ‘The Champion of the Constitution’. Even for things like second amendment rights, where the constitution is fairly clear, supporters should have some backup arguments to explain why the constitutional position is *also* a good one – otherwise opponents can rightly say ‘well, surely you’ll support an amendment to change things, then!’ (like that clown George Will wrt the second amendment).
So, anyway, my green-eyeshade argument about swimming pool deaths is not a dodge from some previous position.

Will they pick up their marbles and go home

Interesting question. There are things I dislike about all the candidates (including Paul), and it’s not easy for me to figure out who my second choice will be. The following are quite important to me:

- opposition to illegal immigration
- support for civil liberties; and in this I include support for habeas corpus and opposition to torture, as well as warrantless wiretapping
- fiscal conservatism
- opposition to the war on drugs
- a federalist stance on other issues, such as homeschooling, health supplements, and whatever else (ideally, abortion and drug laws as well)
- opposition to federalization of healthcare
- conservative (in the sense of cautious, prudent, not radical) foreign policy.

So you can see where I run into problems with everyone including Paul (whose foreign policy is too radical, even if I agree with the general direction of less foreign involvement), and the Libertarians themselves (who are squishy-soft on illegal immigration in addition to sharing Paul’s radical foreign policy). To begin with, of course, almost everyone (on the R side) seems to support the War on Drugs, torture, detention without trial, and increased surveillance with decreased oversight. This pisses me off (and strikes me as deeply unamerican) and is a big reason why I support Paul. On the D side, I can find some candidates who are OK on these issues, but they support illegal immigration (drooling over the prospect of a demographic lock for the Democrats I imagine) and government healthcare, and are reliably lousy on federalism generally.
Possibly Thompson will have to be choice #2, assuming he outlasts Paul.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Ok Here is the statement.

I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other.

Even The wikipedians report that this is about , the dangers of disunion – “The speech created a lasting image of the danger of disunion because of slavery, and it rallied Republicans across the North.”

As for the Iraq war and the war on terror, let me use an admittedly over simplified analogy. Imagine you are a little nerdy kid in 3rd grade, and you really don’t like the biggest toughest kid in the class, because he is always getting the other kids to play baseball instead of D&D. How do you fight him and win ? In a stand up fight he would kick your ass.

What you do is you goad him. you keep doing little annoying things that make him mad, hoping that he will over react. The more he reacts to you, the more the other kids see him as a threat to them too. If you can make him over react, and hit you, for what is seemingly a minor annoyance, you win, because then all the kids will be against him and will sympathize with you for the injustice done to you.

If you are the Big kid, best to back off, ignore and marginalise the nerdy Kid.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Again, here’s the link John:

http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/house.htm

Show me where Lincoln referred to secession!

It’s your intellectual integrity that’s at stake here. And that has a direct impact on how seriously I, or anyone else, should take your opinions on Iraq.

Like or Dislike: 0  0